Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

[barnstmr]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

HAHAHAaaa .. I never claimed to be a good writer. I just re-read my own post.... I guess I was rambling.... "the mighty HAND getting a FOOT-hold". Thats funny even if I do say so myself.

[magman]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

The conversation seems to lead back to compiling the difficulties encountered with T-crafts over the years.

The SDR system seems to be based on Part Numbers & can be difficult to follow without additional research.


At times I have considered taking my PILE of Alerts & Aids & compiling
a doc for individual aircraft types.
Obviously , this would be a commercial venture.

When a person gets his/her A & P there is little "Type Specific" training.
Having access to what others have found can make a newly minted Tech
look like they have a LOT of experience.

Since I'm too busy now I doubt whether I'll go forward with the projects.
I may be able to scan or copy T-craft stuff to forward to someone.
My belief is it would not be as time consuming as a Cherokee; which is what I stated with.

It IS A BIG PILE!

[magman]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

If the material submitted is not separated into indentifiable groups you will have

a pile of data to sort through.

Why looks at mags while researching a fabric problem?

2 folks suggested using ATA.

We could groups use 1,2,3 or a,b,c or dog, carrot , french fries.

Why NOT ATA?

[barnstmr]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

Magman,
I agree... there is a LOT (pile) of information to sort. I have seen suggestions here for gathering together all of the old Taylorcraft club newsletters, photos and discussed items from the forum, available drawings, FAA-SDR data, and the list keeps going. It is a TON. And it takes TIME.

ATA codes are fine... what I am cautioning against is creating a "manual" that looks, smells, tastes, and reads like a 747 SRM or a Learjet service manual. What I am trying to get across is that a self-contained document (manual) to cover all of this is like laying out everything in one basket for your I.A. of friendly FAA inspector to grab ahold of and take it to the Nth degree. Also, I am cautioning that creating an "Annual Inspection" document is not recommended for the same reason.

Instead, I think there are some really neat ways to package all of this information so that it is useful. The foundation website or even this forum software could be set-up to do this. Or... Some of the current blog formats or other internet tools can be a great way to distribute information so that it is easy to search and useful.

As long as this is a "PROPOSAL" lets talk about doing this with 21st century computer technology. Lets discuss what kind of formats, contributors, web-based tools, and other resources are available. Perhaps create a searchable technical information blog type format to which many users may contribute information. In fact, this might just be something I could help with. I am sure there are far more capable computer people out there than me. But I am convinced this would be a most effective format.

You could even use ATA codes as a flag to each blog-entry to help make the data more searchable.

If this is done correctly, it could be implemented as an extension of this forum and could capitalize on the breadth of knowledge among its members in a more efficient way than is currently available. Perhaps this is something I might consider implementing into my own web-log. Lets keep the dialog going and see where this leads.

[mhorowit]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

One might use (as input) the aging aircraft document that floated around some time ago - Mike

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

Terry has a good point. I like the ATA/JASC codes, but only as a way to sort the photos and information. If you want information on a particular component they would allow you to find it without going through the whole database of information. I can tell you I liked Forrests Annual sheet enough to print it out to go with me to the airport and go over my plane. Even it had a lot more detail than is needed of a prewar with no electrical system and I plane to see if it can be simplified for our use.
We need to keep the Annual guide separate from the rebuild, restoration, "how the heck does this go together" bigger document with all the details from the ATA/JASC codes. Even that we don't want to become a single source "manual" for the Taylorcraft. If the FAA takes it and makes it the "Official" manual we will have to go through THEIR system to make any changes which will make it so hard to use and update it will be useless, if not impossible to understand once full of "Federalese".
Hank

Yes,"the mighty HAND getting a FOOT-hold" is funny, but you need more than one good joke to go pro! Keep em coming.

[Mark Julicher]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

What is wrong with the inspection checklist in the Taylorcraft Service manual??
I think I am missing something here.

An for the sake of discussion, I like checklists that have verbs not just nouns, so instead of something like:
Wheels

An inspection checklist should be more like:
Grease wheel bearings
Inspect wheel halves for cracks
Check tire pressure
Adjust brakes

[magman]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

After obtaining my A & P my first task was putting fabric on a Taylorcraft.

Grade A of course.

Prior to this assignment I did not know what a T-Craft was.

Aviation Maintenance Technician Schools are certified under FAR Part 147.

Subjects taught include Electrical, Ignition, Welding, Paint, Fabric , Sheet Metal,

Corrosion Control , etc etc.

Note this is NOT Cessna, Beech, Piper, Boeing, etc.

There is very little type specific training in the process.

A person could obtain the A & P & not know the difference between a Kaman &

a Culver.

Privileges & limitations of the A & P are found in FAR 65.

This is the A & P equivalent of what Part 61 is to a pilot.

Significant here is that the A & P cannot legally perform tasks & inspections

unless they have been trained or worked under an experienced mechanic.

There are other options but it is not my point here.

Currently ; MANY A & P's are of the Chrome-Hair generation.

Many are retiring & few replacements are in sight.

Compiling a "Tips & Pointers" manual would certainly help any new Techs.

Defects found & acceptable methods of repair would be invaluable.

This may help the New Guy turn into a Charles Taylor ( Wilbur & Orville's

"Mechanician").


Over the years I have come to believe that T-crafts have the WORST exhaust

systems of all light aircraft.

When inspecting a "T" I would NEVER consider not pressurizing the Exhaust

& spraying soapy water .

It did take me a while to reach this conclusion.

Why not publish pix of cracks & leaks so other can know this as well?

I'm sure there are those that really don't want to know but my belief is that

most folks really want a safe aircraft.

There is little point in reinventing the wheel.

The Type Clubs are the best source to get this going.

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

I think the "Noun" list using the ATA/JASC codes as a guide has merit. It is just a guide to locate information related to the part of the plane you are looking at in the REBUILD/RESTORATION Guide. That guide would be nice to have for the mechanic when he wants to see how something is put together he isn't familiar with. The VERB part falls under that section and it is ALL a RECOMMENDATION on what you could look at.

I like what was said about having a simple ANNUAL Guide (SEPARATE from the Rebuild/Restoration Guide) like what is in the manual or what Forrest posted, "Taylored" to our planes.

Keep the Annual Guide SIMPLE and the minimum inspection any of us would want for any Taylorcraft. Owners could add items to their list for their planes and provide the list to their mechanic as a GUIDE. The mechanic is still responsible, but I can't imagine any good mechanic not looking at (as a minimum) what the owner asked them to. I also DON'T want hydraulic brakes, battery, or electrical system on my list so make the Annual Guide as basic as possible.

Like Magman said, most of the new mechanics don't have a CLUE what the proper configuration is for a Taylorcraft. The first Annual I got the IA said I had an illegal exhaust. He thought Taylorcrafts were supposed to have Cub exhausts and thought the factory one was home made! After all, only a home made exhaust would be THAT hard to put on and off and inspect! I had to show him original pictures from Chet's book and an old parts list. He just shook his head and ignored the plywood instrument panel.

Hank

The panel is fixed now.

[Dennis Keels]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

After 60 some odd years I think what we got is just fine. Taylorcrafts are not falling out of the sky like rocks. The more we talk about the more the FEDS. learn. I like keeping then in the dark as much as I can. If it's not broke don't fix it.

[Edwin Otha]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

I don't think producing an Inspection Manual would be a good idea. Finding an Inspector that has the needed reference library would be a better idea. A document of this nature needs to be updated and revised to be of any use. Everyone that has these little airplanes know where the areas for intensified are located. The rest is covered by Part 43 appendix d.
EO

[jim cooper]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

Thank you Dennis! This is a VERY simple aircraft, about as basic as you can get. I have a very adequate check list made up by former owners and AI's that will more than suffice. There are still quite a few around who know tube and fabric and the T-Craft is a piece of cake to them. I agree also about the exhaust. I feel a much more suitable system is to put a Luscombe exhaust on the T-Craft. If the cost were not prohibative, mine would have a starter, a modified 85 hp engine making it an honest 100 hp. and a good radio. If these airplanes were not products of the depression I feel sure these items would have been included. A T-Craft, 65 HP on a hot day,(85-95degrees) is a real drag to fly, except when taking off. Then, it can be dangerous with two people and more exciting than need be. Mine just PANTS up over the trees in hot weather with two people and 12 gallons of gas. (2300 ft, hard surface.) Unfortunatley, Maryland has ALOT of this type weather in summer. JP

[Guest]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

Over the years I have come to believe that T-crafts have the WORST exhaust systems of all light aircraft.

I am not sure, it may be that T-crafts the have the WORST door openings of all light aircraft.

[Pearson]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

This has been an interesting thread to watch! But now it seems to have wandered off subject. We all know the Taylorcraft isn't perfect. But then again, what airplane is. The great thing about the Taylorcraft is the way it flies. It is an honest airplane with no real vices. Sure it is hard to get into, sure the exhaust is a bear to deal with, and yes it is a little cramped for larger people. But all the other airplanes have their trade offs also.

I think the idea of a document, website, video or some form of editable media that can be made available to Taylorcraft owners that shows the how to, and where at, of all of our maintenance & retoration issues would be a great thing. Many have brought up the issue of it being turned into a hammer to beat us over the head with. Many of us are in the process of restoring our aircraft. Others are actively flying theirs. I consider myself lucky to be in both of those groups. So the ones doing the restorations need info on how each area is best restored. The ones flying need info on inspection and maintenance.

How about a website that details visually how each piece is to be rebuilt, with a cataloging system that can be referred to in a separate inspection/maintenance document. Aside from the detailed photos and captions describing the finer points of rebuilding and restoring each part, the key would be the cataloging system so that each piece could be referred to easily in the inspection/maintenance document. The inspection sheet should be kept to a minimum, only listing the areas or items to be inspected, and the limits of pass or fail on the inspection. It could contain a reference number beside each item that would refer to the portion of the website that deals with that part of the airplane. No one but us would need to know what the reference number on the inspection document is. This would keep those unaware of the restoration material on the website from using it as a hammer to beat us over the head.

[swoeric]

Re: Taylorcraft Inspection Manual proposal

I am in full agreement with Richard. I like the idea of a very thorough inspection list. Last I remember our mechanic may decide how thorough of an annual to provide. it seems that most of us seem to do our own supervised work or assist. I imagine we are more thorough than some mechanics doing an annual for just anybody. I like the idea of having verbs added. I hope that we leave specifics off. nobody needs to know mine didnt orginally come with 8.50's, that there weren't scott 3200's back then, that 3 inches make any difference in the gear legs, or that very extended baggage was available, skylights and removable panels for gas tanks make sense. none of these things need to be called out by part number or configuration in an annual list to make it thorough. we could use some of the learned tribal knowledge though in areas such as corrosion, vibration, fatigue and signs thereof.

I propose a detailed list of possible annual items written in a manner so as to check flying condition (check tires for weathering and tread, grease wheel bearings, check wheel half's for cracks)

I would propose a secondary source of information that may detail how this checks should be carried out and organized by subject (refurbishment of shinn brakes, mounting tires, verification of ignition wires and shielding, timing mags, cleaning up prop, patching fabric, mounting bungees,)

the secondary source would also maybe contain proven and desirable stc's (adding skylight, bigger tires, harness points, etc.)

I would then also do a restoration guide. This is something that would list all of the little details that could be routed out here.

I know many of you are worried about being beatten down by our own information. Realisticlly we already know where we take our plane for maintenace and why it goes there. most of the improvements that we dont want known slide under the radar as it is. if it came to a crash investigation a good portion of them would still go unnoticed. when it comes to insurrence I will have a hard time dropping myself from my self insured hull policy.

the information can only help us.